Multithreading: WAITAl wartet nicht wie erwartet
-
15-11-2019 - |
Frage
Ich habe einen Thread, der zwei separate Threads anruft, um einer Unterarbeit zu tun.Wann immer jeder der Jobs ein WAITHANDLE.Set abgeschlossen ist.(). generasacodicetagpre.
Was vermisse ich?
update: generasacodicetagpre.
Lösung 2
new Thread(() =>
{
new Thread(() =>
{
_priceA = _service.GetPriceA();
_waithandle[0].Set();
}).Start();
new Thread(() =>
{
_priceB = _service.GetPriceB();
_waithandle[1].Set();
}).Start();
WaitHandle.WaitAll(_waithandle);
PriceA = _priceA;
PriceB = _priceB;
}).Start();
This did the job for me. Culprit was the INotifyChangedProperty() of the PriceA and PriceB which updated the UI too early making my waitall redundant. In case someone else has a similar issue...
Andere Tipps
You're creating a separate thread to wait... but the code after the statement you've given will continue because you're not waiting in that thread. In other words, you're creating three threads:
- Thread X: Creates threads A and B, then waits for them to finish
- Thread A: Gets PriceA and then sets waitHandle[0]
- Thread B: Gets PriceB and then sets waitHandle[1]
But thread X is doing nothing after it's waited, so what's the point of waiting within it?
Additionally, it would be a lot simpler to just call Join
on the extra threads that you've created. In fact, if you only need to wait in the "current" thread, you only need one extra thread in the first place:
Thread t = new Thread(() => { PriceA = _service.GetPriceA(); });
t.Start();
PriceB = _service.GetPriceB();
t.Join();
// Other code
By the time you reach "other code", both PriceA and PriceB will have been set. Of course, this is missing a considerable amount of error handling... but that's easier to add when you've got a simpler starting point than your currently over-complicated code.
Are you resetting correctly the _waithandle[0]
and [1]
? For example:
_waithandle[0] = new ManualResetEvent(false);
_waithandle[1] = new ManualResetEvent(false);